e0y2e3 wrote:I swear to christ (and I fear this may happen) if Gilbert drafts him in the top five as a PR stunt I'm flying to Ohio and beating up that angry midget (Gilbert, not Sullinger) myself.

I'll say this about the kid, and it no way has anything to do with what you're saying e0y because I agree a Top 5 may be too high given his size, but that kid has more game than Matta's offense allows him to display. I've been impressed with his shot when he takes it as well as his vision in the passing game.

He's more than a college low post beast.

Not big enough to do battle down low for a living IMHO, but he's going to be a nice player for someone if he continues to develop. And if he's not done growing......

But the Cavs need a difference maker/game changer and I'm not sure he's that.

Perry Jones is the untapped talented mystery (similar to Favors last year, not in game but rawness).

Kanter is a beast that clearly outplayed Sullinger last year at the Nike Hoops Summit (Sullinger didn't play bad, Kanter was just that good).

Pretty much if you get the one pick right now it's Kyrie or die. Beyond that things aren't clear but I'd personally rather take a raw guy with insane upside than a guy who is going to be for sure okay to very good but has no star potential (Sullinger).

It's a top five pick in the NBA draft and the Cavs are in no position to add solid.

Perry Jones is the untapped talented mystery (similar to Favors last year, not in game but rawness).

Kanter is a beast that clearly outplayed Sullinger last year at the Nike Hoops Summit (Sullinger didn't play bad, Kanter was just that good).

Pretty much if you get the one pick right now it's Kyrie or die. Beyond that things aren't clear but I'd personally rather take a raw guy with insane upside than a guy who is going to be for sure okay to very good but has no star potential (Sullinger).

It's a top five pick in the NBA draft and the Cavs are in no position to add solid.

I'm all for the Cavs taking Kyrie with their first pick. Has he said anything one way or the other about leaving after this year, or is he (along with others) waiting to see what happens with the potential lockout?

e0y - I heard Sullinger compared to Boozer the other day, assuming Sullinger shows he has a respectable mid-range game. I haven't seen enough of him to make that comparison one way or the other, but I'm wondering if that's even close to a valid comparison.

May I remind all you Doubting Thomases that Sullinger will be 19 years old next month. Meaning (1) he's still got 2 more years to grow; and (2) he's still got 8-10 years to build on his game. Even if he declares, I'm not saying that he should be #1, but considering what else is out there, he would be a great 1st-round choice for a team that can take a bit of a chance. The Cavs are AT LEAST 3 years from .500 and might be able to afford the time that it could take for Sully to completely develop his game.

Kyrie - did you watch him at Duke? I watched three of his seven games just to see what he really was and he is a legit, legit, legit PG prospect.

He was hyped coming in and exceeded that hype by far. Could he fall off? Sure, but I doubt it and look at this draft....

BTW: saying that if Sullinger can live in the mid range world he is comprable to Boozer is a fair comp, albeit he hasn't shown any of that in his game. People swear he can though. They really do. His boarding reminds me of Boozers style as well.

I've seen him live half a dozen times. He can bang with just about anyone.

No one at this level has given any issues CDT, I agree with that.

But 82 games of banging with guys bigger and stronger is going to take its toll. He's a couple years removed from being borderline morbidly obese and he's gone long way toward fixing himself since, but in my eyes he's not ready for an NBA season worth of collisions.

Sullinger is just not the pick for a team in the position of the Cavaliers, just isn't. Not to mention the transition from NCAA to NBA is much more difficult for post players than G's. Sullinger as legit as he is still has plenty of the boy amongst men angle to his success right now. Nice player in the NBA, probably, the kind of player to build around that you have to take real high in order to so when you will still need 3 years worth of acquisitions to get good, no.

Even though this draft is pretty crappy in terms of studs, the Cavs have to go for broke, and might have to play the law of averages and do it again next year.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

LOL - I actually thought of that when I was writing that post. I used those guys because I feel like I have a basic understanding where those guys rank in the scheme of things. I could have used Isaiah but I get the feeling that nobody has his ceiling. I'll have to wait until Paul is closer to retirement before someone tells me where he ranks.

Also, I just now used google images to find out if Kyrie is white or black. I didn't know for sure.

Paul's predraft Scouting report (for the sake of comparison and of course, keeping in mind age differences):

*again, not calling him Paul so don't come at me like that. Just comparing the styles.

April 16, 2005StrengthsDynamic, Explosive, Electric, Dominantonly a few of the words used to describe Chris Paul's game. Paul is one of the better all-around PG prospects to come along in the past decade, and there isn't much about his game that isn't a strength.

The first thing you notice about Paul is his explosiveness with the ball. There really isn't anybody that can stop him from getting to the basket, with his dynamite first step and ability to get the ball above the rim before shot blockers can alter it.

Furthering this strength is Paul's ability to recognize offensive opportunities and exploit them. He understands how to get by defenders on the break, and is relentless at pushing the ball and getting to the basket. If he sees a potential help defender slacking, he will be at the rim before that defender realizes what is happening. Paul is a master of things like splitting defenders, and changing pace to gain that miniscule opening he needs.

While he certainly has the open court speed of a TJ Ford, Dee Brown, or Raymond Felton, none of those point guards break down the defense off the dribble and consistently get to the basket as effectively as Chris Paul.

As a floor general, Paul might not quite have the creativity of the truly great pass-first point guards, but he runs an offense effectively and is very efficient with the ball. Paul has incredibly quick hands, as his nearly 2.5/1 assist-to-turnover ratio would indicate. At Wake Forest, Paul ran an offense full of players that needed consistent shots, and always shared the ball quite nicely. He understands tempo, distributes the ball in an intelligent fashion, and always finds the open man.

Some might question why a player of Paul's obvious talents only averaged 15 points per game, and was so inconsistent as a scorer on a night-by-night basis. Rest assured that this is only because of Paul's role as a distributor, and the fact that he played on a team with numerous other capable scorers.

In addition to his ability to break down defenses off the dribble, Paul has developed into a great outside shooter, hitting 47% of his 3-pointers this season. He can score in a variety of ways, whether it set shots from the outside or acrobatic, floating drives from the mid-range.

Paul has developed a reputation as a clutch player, and always steps up against big competition. He scored 50 points in two games against Duke this season, and had 27 against UNC and Raymond Felton early in the ACC slate. Paul seems to understand when his team needs a big scoring performance, or even simply a big basket. He will always step up his scoring output in these situations.

While his team ended up losing, Paul's performance down the stretch against West Virginia in the second round of the NCAA tourney typifies the kind of player that he is. While the Mountaineers kept finding ways to hit big shots, Paul nearly single-handedly matched them, basket for basket, before he fouled out.

Finally, Paul is the consummate competitor on the floor. While this desire to win sometimes causes him to take things too far, he leaves it all out on the court every time, and oftentimes simply wills his team to a victory.

It's hard not to get excited about a player that is so complete in doing what he can to get a win.

WeaknessesPaul is a remarkably well-rounded point guard and prospect, but there are a few negatives to mention.

With his quick hands and dominant lateral quickness, you would expect Paul to be a dominant defender. However, he is mediocre at best in this area. While he ends up with a lot of steals, he isn't always an aggressive defender, and doesn't eat up opposing ball handlers the way that he should.

Wake Forest was a very poor defensive team this season, and it showed up in the tournament. While some of that falls on Skip Prosser's system and a few of Paul's teammates, Paul's inability to lock up primary ball handlers (go back to that West Virginia game again), is a place to start when discussing the Demon Deacons' defensive woes.

At a generous 6'0, Paul is a bit undersized as a point in the NBA. While his explosiveness more than makes up for it, Paul may have to adjust some of the things he does as far as attacking the basket. He may have trouble guarding some of the bigger point guards in the league as well.

Finally, while it's hard to call a player too competitive, it seems like Paul may have become just that during the ACC slate this past season. He developed a reputation as a guy who is willing to throw a cheap shot, even before the incident in the last game of the regular season where he punched Juilus Hodge below the belt.

Furthermore, there were some late season rumors of locker room unrest at Wake Forest. This is something that NBA teams will probably look into, though it's hard to see a team passing on Paul because of personality issues. He is too dynamic a presence on the floor.

OutlookPaul is generally considered the number one point guard in the 2005 draft, and it isn't too hard to see why. There really isn't anything he doesn't do well, and his ability to break people down off the dribble is nothing short of spectacular. Unless something drastic happens, he's a top selection on draft night - probably top 3.

1. "Paul might not quite have the creativity of the truly great pass-first point guards"2. "doesn't eat up opposing ball handlers the way that he should"3. "He developed a reputation as a guy who is willing to throw a cheap shot".

Don't see how the Cavs don't pluck Kyrie if given the chance since a playmakin PG is the foundation of Byron Scott teams. But I get more excited every time I see the Selfish Motherfucker from Kentucky play. Dude's built and looks like he has a good overall game. Just afraid all he's ever gonna be is Josh Smith--love the desire, hate the 'tude.

e0y2e3 wrote:I swear to christ (and I fear this may happen) if Gilbert drafts him in the top five as a PR stunt I'm flying to Ohio and beating up that angry midget (Gilbert, not Sullinger) myself.

I'll say this about the kid, and it no way has anything to do with what you're saying e0y because I agree a Top 5 may be too high given his size, but that kid has more game than Matta's offense allows him to display. I've been impressed with his shot when he takes it as well as his vision in the passing game.

He's more than a college low post beast.

Not big enough to do battle down low for a living IMHO, but he's going to be a nice player for someone if he continues to develop. And if he's not done growing......

But the Cavs need a difference maker/game changer and I'm not sure he's that.

Is there one coming out at any position?

People thought the exact same things about Kevin Love, and he's the best rebounder the NBA has seen in decades. Sullinger has the motor to grab plenty of rebounds in the NBA, and the strength and skill to score consistently down low.

e0y2e3 wrote:Jones is a wildcard. Mad skills but the combo-forward thing may be of concern. Could see him going anywhere from 4-10.

Knight mid first to early second. So-so D, turnovers, decision making all hurt. Also isn't a great finisher. Ridiculously talented though and could end up being a huge value pick.

You have to take Jones. Irving could be a tremendous playmaker, but crap, look at the Cavs frontcourt. It's a disgrace.

The Cavs are in dire need of any type of talent in the frontcourt. You look at Sessions and Eyenga in the backcourt, and you can at least make a shred of a case that you could move forward with them and at least see what you have for the next year or so.

In the frontcourt, the Cavs are in a world of hurt. J.J. Hickson is grabbing 15 boards a game because no one else can grab them. The suckage of this frontcourt is, I fear, tricking the Cavs into thinking Hickson has untapped upside.

You have to take Jones if he's there. He might turn out to be Danny Ferry, but he might turn out to be KD 2.0. He's 6'-11" with a 7'-2" wingspan, ball handling skills and range on his jumper. If you're the Cavs, you take the ceiling guy. You're not winning anytime soon, so you're drafting for 2013 and beyond.

Honorable mention if the Cavs somehow win enough to fall out of the top five: Jordan Hamilton of Texas. Lanky 6'-7" wingman with a smooth outside shot and at least the potential to be a long-armed pest on defense.

Ziner wrote:These avatars really mess with me, with the takes of such similar quality I can never tell who is e0y and who is rat tail.

e0y do me a favor and just switch that avatar over to Tyreke Evans or Jared Sullinger or something.

It's similar to the tots/tits avatar war between you and moscratch!

Galley Boys are slop on top of a so-so burger and a bun you coulde get from a Covneninet food mart generic pack. They the Antoine Joubert of burgers; soft, sloppy, oozing grease and cheap sauce and extremely overrated by a biased fan base. Proof that if you throw enough cheap sauce shit on a burger you still can't overcome the lame burger. -JB

e0y2e3 wrote:And Cass just explained how you end up with Marvin Williams instead of Chris Paul.

Ridiculous upside is nice but you need upside and quality with the #1 pick in the draft.

And I fully agree the Cavs have possibly the worst front court ever assembled at the moment.

I don't think Marvin Williams ever had the upside of Jones. But he is a gamble.

Regardless, whoever picks first (and something tells me it won't be the Cavs) is probably going to be forced into an overdraft. Sullinger and Irving are the surest things among the projected top picks in terms of knowing what you're going to get, and neither one of them would be on the pedestal if there was even a D-Rose level prospect coming out, let alone a KD or LeBron.

This could end up being a draft with some substance, but it really lacks a sure front end. There's no stone-cold-lock, must-have prospect at the top of the list. The draft order could be totally rearranged by early April once the tourney ends.

Ultimately, the Cavs might be able to get the same type of player at 5-8 that they could get at 1-3. It could be a good player. But the longer the season goes on, the less adamant I am that the Cavs pick first.

You clearly forget all the "Marvin Williams, athletic freak with insane upsideQ@$!$!!" hype.

Anyhow, Sullinger is a sure thing to be serviceable maybe, nothing more. Irving actually has great upside and Barnes is making a strong push at being the second best prospect. Jones is just crazy unreliable and will fall down a bit because of it. Either way I feel you on one thing, Cavs could very well be picking 3 or 4 and if so will seriously consider him. It wouldn't be right if they grabbed the top pick. (same can be said about both Jones in actuality)

With as lame as this draft is if they can get one of the top four prospects and then land in the top five again next year and address another position I'll be happy as a peach. Can't draft for positions at this point, take BPA and keep drafting in the top ten for the next couple years.

Oh and as I said before, guys like Paul and Williams were never Rose/Wall caliber prospects either. Those two are special athletic freaks. Doesn't mean less athletic guys can't end up being better players.